PRE-TRIAL SCRIPT

CHARACTERS:

Judge - Francis Louie Humawid

Plaintiff Counsel - Mark Jay Troyo
Defense Counsel - George Jo
Clerk of Court - Robercito Villorente
Plaintiff - Angel Berongoy
Defendant - Dominador De Cadiz

Clerk of Court: All rise! Honorable Judge Francis Louie Humawid is in court. Let’s pray.

Almighty God, we stand in Your Holy Presence as our Supreme Judge. We

humbly beseech You to bless and inspire us so that what we think, say and do will be in
accordance with Your will. Enlighten our minds, strengthen our spirit and fill our hearts
with fraternal love, wisdom and understanding, so that we can become effective channels
of truth, justice and peace. In our proceeding today, guide us in the path of righteousness
for the fulfillment of Your greater glory. Amen.

Judge : Call the cases.

Clerk of Court : No. 1 in the calendar your Honor is the case of Angel Berongoy vs.
Dominador De Cadiz for the action of “Forcible Entry.

Judge : Counsel for Plaintiff.

Atty. Troyo : For the Plaintiff, your Honor, ready for the Pre-Trial.

Judge : Counsel for Defendant

Atty. Jo : For the Defendant, your Honor, ready for the Pre-Trial.

Judge : Okay, so let’s proceed.

Stipulations and admissions

Judge : Now, will the distinguished counsel of the defendant admit the
following facts as appearing in the pre-trial brief of the
plaintiff:

Q : Does the defendant admit to be the same LENI G. ROBREDO that

is the person being pleaded to unlawfully dispossessed over the
plaintiff’s property by means of either force, intimidation, strategy,
threat, and stealth?

Defendant : Yes, your Honor.

Q : Does the defendant admit that she is the sole heir of KAREN
DAVILA as claimed by the plaintiff?

Defendant : Yes, your Honor.

 2

Q : Does the defendant admit to deforced the plaintiff from their

possession in view of the latter’s property by means of
FISTS?

Defendant : No, your Honor.

Q : Does the defendant admit that such property was sold to LOVI
POE knowing that the property was already sold to the
plaintiff?

Defendant : No, your Honor.

Q : Does the defendant admit that she files a Petition for Cancellation
of CLOA No. 003309494 registered in the name of the
plaintiff?

Defendant : No, your Honor.

Q : Does the defendant admit that she intimidates and pressures the
plaintiff’s tenant to vacate the land?

Defendant : No, your Honor.

Q : Does the defendant admit that by strategy or stealth she convinced

plaintiff’s other tenant Carlo Katigbak not to give the
proceeds of the land to plaintiff?

Defendant : No, your Honor.

Q : Does the defendant admit the jurisdiction of this court?

Defendant : Yes, your Honor.

Judge : Please take note this stipulations, Clerk of Court.

Does the counsel for the Plaintiff have any comments?

Atty. Troyo : None, your Honor.

Pieces of Evidence and witnesses

Judge : Now we proceed to the pieces of evidence and witnesses to be

presented by both parties.

Counsel for the plaintiff may start.

Atty. Troyo : I have here with me your Honor documentary and objects
evidences which I move to be marked as Exhibit A to F.

Your honor, Exhibit A is the Certification to File

Action dated August 16, 2020 authorizing the filing of this
complaint.

Judge : Mark it.

 3

Atty. Troyo : Your honor, Exhibit B is the Tax Declaration No. 6135 which will
show that the property contains of land area of 1.5423
hectares more or less, and registered in the name of claimant
KAREN DAVILA.

Judge : Mark it.

Atty. Troyo : Your honor, Exhibit C is the Deed of Real Estate Mortgage to
prove that the defendant mortgages the disputed real property to
the plaintiff on July 6, 1989.

Judge : Mark it.

Atty. Troyo : Your honor, Exhibit D is the Deed of Absolute sale dated February
7, 1990 which wil prove that the disputed property was sold by the
defendant to the plaintiff.

Judge : Mark it.

Atty. Troyo : Your honor, Exhibit E is a series of Real Property Tax Receipt
which will prove that the plaintiff paid local taxes from
years 1975 to 2020.

Judge : Mart it.

Atty. Troyo : Your honor, Exhibit F is the Affidavit of Tenants to prove that the
plaintiff took actual possession of the property prior to the
sale on June 15, 1990.

Judge : Have it marked.

Any further comments counsel?

Atty. Troyo : Just for the record your honor, I have three (3) witnesses.

1) Ms. Lovi Po who is the second (2nd) buyer in the foregoing

disputed parcel of land. Her judicial affidavit will serve as
direct testimony in the above-mentioned case to corroborate the
testimony of Plaintiff Rodrigo Duterte and to identify pertinent
exhibits to support the allegation of the complaint. She shall
take the witness stand on September 14, 2020.

2) Ms. Ces Drilon who is a government employee of the Registry

of Deeds, RO VIII. Her judicial affidavit will also serve as
direct testimony in the above-mentioned case to corroborate the
testimony of Plaintiff Rodrigo Duterte and to identify pertinent
exhibits to support the allegation of the complaint. She shall
take the witness stand on September 16, 2020

3) Mr. Carlo Katigbak who a tenant of the plaintiff. Likewise,

his judicial affidavit will serve as direct testimony in the above-
mentioned case to corroborate the testimony of Plaintiff
Rodrigo Duterte and to identify pertinent exhibits to support
 4

the allegation of the complaint. She shall take the witness stand
on September 18, 2020.

Atty. Jo : Your Honor, we would like to manifest our reservation for the
cross-examinations of the plaintiff and the three (3) witnesses.
Likewise, to present other exhibits on the course of the trial.

Judge : Noted counsel, Ms. Clerk of Court please take note. Are there any
additional exhibits and witnesses to be presented counsel of
the plaintiff?

Atty. Troyo : None your honor.

Judge : Now we proceed to the pieces of evidence and witnesses to be

presented by opposing party.

Counsel for the defendant may start.

Atty. Jo : Your honor, Exhibit 1 is the Tax Declaration to prove that the
defendant is the lawful possessor or has title over the disputed
property.

Judge : Have it marked.

Atty. Jo : Your honor, Exhibit 2 is the Original Certificate of Title registered

under the name of KAREN DAVILA and will show that
the defendant is the sole heir of former.

Judge : Have it marked.

Atty. Jo : Your honor, Exhibit 3 is the Deed of Real Estate Mortgage which
will prove that the disputed property was merely mortgaged to the
plaintiff.

Judge : Have it marked.

Any further comments counsels?

Atty. Jo : Just for the record your honor, I have three (3) witnesses.

1) Mr. Juan Cinco who is the Barangay Captain over the place
where disputed parcel of land is located. His judicial affidavit will
serve as direct testimony in the above-mentioned case to
corroborate the testimony of Defendant Leni Robredo and to
identify pertinent exhibits to support the allegation of the
complaint. He shall take the witness stand on October 5, 2020.

2) Mr. Isko Moreno who is Municipal Treasurer over the place

where the disputed parcel of land is located. His judicial affidavit
will serve as direct testimony in the above-mentioned case to
corroborate the testimony of Defendant Leni Robredo and to
identify pertinent exhibits to support the allegation of the
complaint. He shall take the witness stand on October 7, 2020.

3) Ms. Maria Mitra who is a resident over the place where the
disputed parcel of land is located. His judicial affidavit will serve
as direct testimony in the above-mentioned case to corroborate the
 5

testimony of Defendant Leni Robredo and to testify that she had

open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and
occupation of such parcel of land. She shall take the witness stand
on October 9, 2020.

Atty. Troyo : Your Honor, we would like to manifest our reservation for the
cross-examinations of the defendant and the three (3) witnesses.
Likewise, to present other exhibits on the course of the trial.

Judge : Noted counsel, Ms. Clerk of Court please take note. Are there any
additional exhibits and witnesses to be presented counsel of the
defendant?

Atty. Troyo : None your honor.

Judge : Be it noted counsels that under the new innovation of the Pre-Trial,
a Judge is now allowed to render judgment after pre-trial hearing
based on the Rules on Summary Judgement or Judgment on the
Pleading. And if there are issues need to be tried it can be limited.

Atty. Troyo : Noted Judge

Atty. Jo : Noted Judge

Judge : Upon assessment of the pleadings of both parties as

well as the pieces of evidence, the action is susceptible to
amicable settlement. And as a Judge, I should be proactive and
exert an honest to goodness effort to at least have the case settled
at the pre-trial. Then, if there are still triable issue it can be limited.

Are the parties willing to settle the issue through amicable

settlement?

Atty. Troyo : No, your honor at the moment we believe that there is no
possibility of amicable settlement.

Judge : What about the defendant?

Atty. Jo : Your honor, we confirm the manifestation of the counsel for the
plaintiff. On our part, we also believe that there is no possibility of
of settlement. We likewise do not agree to any settlement.

Judge : I know that the parties may think that it is just a cause of delaying
the resolution of the case, but if we comply the with the released
new rules it will in effect shorten the lifespan of the litigation so
the Judge now attempts to secure amicable settlement between the
parties.

Atty. Troyo : Noted, your honor.

Atty. Jo : We understand your honor.

Judge : Is there any new proposal for settlement from the defendant?

Atty Jo : None your honor, with all due respect it seems it is just a waste of
time. We believe that the resolution of the case could be
 6

properly achieved by presentation of our evidence and the

witnesses.

Judge : Counsel may I invite your attention to the released new rules, it
justifies for an initiative towards settlement between parties and
this is really more for the benefit of your client more than anyone
else. It will save more time and expenses of the litigation. And
your client may even incur greater expense if this case goes to trial.

Atty. Jo : Noted your honor, but this is to secure that the rights of my client
is being protected.

Judge : Anything I say is for the purpose of making the parties agreed to a
settlement, hence I am not prejudging the case.

Since there are remaining issues, the said issues shall be referred to
court-annexed mediation for a non-extendible period of 30 days.
Moreover, Judicial Dispute Resolution is not anymore mandatory,
it is discretionary only when the judge of the court to which the
case was originally raffled is convinced that settlement is still
possible. The Judicial Dispute Resolution shall be conducted
within a non-extendible period of 15 calendar days from notice of
failure of the CAM. Otherwise, the parties shall proceed to trial
which shall start within 30 calendar days from termination of the
Pre-Trial.

Judge : Is that understood?

Atty. Troyo : Yes, your honor.

Atty. Jo : Yes, your honor.

Judge : Session is now adjourned.

-end-

Constant desire to be the best version of youself - Black Mamba